[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10999?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15875384#comment-15875384
]
Takanobu Asanuma commented on HDFS-10999:
-----------------------------------------
Hi all, thanks for the discussion. I would like to propose my suggestion.
I understand how important to divide the metrics into replicated-blocks and
ec-block-groups. But I also think summarized(repl+ec) metrics are useful. At
the moment, in {{FSNamesystem}}, {{FSNamesystemMBean}} has the summarized
metrics. How about leaving {{FSNamesystemMBean}} as is and adding new two
mbeans for replicated-blocks and ec-block-groups to {{FSNamesystem}}? In this
way, it would be easy to keep code consistency with branch-2.
> Use more generic "low redundancy" blocks instead of "under replicated" blocks
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-10999
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10999
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: erasure-coding
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0-alpha1
> Reporter: Wei-Chiu Chuang
> Assignee: Manoj Govindassamy
> Labels: hdfs-ec-3.0-nice-to-have, supportability
>
> Per HDFS-9857, it seems in the Hadoop 3 world, people prefer the more generic
> term "low redundancy" to the old-fashioned "under replicated". But this term
> is still being used in messages in several places, such as web ui, dfsadmin
> and fsck. We should probably change them to avoid confusion.
> File this jira to discuss it.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
